Finalizing Tokenomics

Tokenomics so far

The main purpose of the Seed token has been bootstrapping MetaGame.
It was an experiment in building without raising money first & the idea was that Seeds can only be created through labor.

2 Stakeholder types

  • Players, generating & earning Seeds by working on MetaGame
  • Patrons, seeing the value being created & “watering Seeds” (adding Ether to the pool)

Something like this:

Where we are at now

We are 3/4 of the way through the “Seed phase”, wanting to finalize the “Phase II” tokenomics so we can move on with small-scale fundraising for the next 6-8 months.

Our newsletter & podcast are at a point where they can become self-sustainable through sponsorships, the platform itself reached 1.0 status with all the basic functionality live.

Going forward, Phase I (Seeds) > Phase II (Growth)

To recap: Players generate & earn Seeds, then sell or “plant” them. Patrons see the value, then buy or “water” Seeds.

This keeps MetaGame going until Phase II, when Seeds grow into Trees & there is a proper fundraise to propel explosive growth.

3 stakeholder types

  • Users, paying for features & fees on the platform
  • Members (players + patrons), burning a subscription & upvoting/crowdfunding features
  • Guilds, buying & staking as buy-in, paying services, burning a subscription & upvoting/crowdfunding features

Sources of funding & value retention

In Phase II, the main source of funding will be the funding raised but MetaGame will also start generating revenue which will be flowing back into the token.

  • Fundraise itself
  • Sponsorships for the newsletter & the podcast, funding educational content
  • Paid features on the platform, such as using search & filtering of player profiles (useful for finding contributors for projects), custom backgrounds & blocks on MyMeta & the dashboard.
  • Upvoting Quests with tokens (so members & guilds can guide & incentivize feature prioritization)
  • Focusing on integrations; other projects being naturally incentivized to build integrations for MetaOS & MyMeta as way of getting more users
  • Other projects using MetaOS for their communities, thus being incentivized to build more features themselves
  • Circular economy: having a market where people & guilds exchange services in Trees (it already happened that players offered work to others for Seeds & TEC offered their course). Upvoting other people’s posts with tokens, etc.

Going to Phase III - Equilibrium

In terms of tokenomics, Phase III is all about finding equilibrium & growing naturally rather than through external injections of capital.
Sources of funding & value retention are all of the above except “fundraise”.

Tokens through phases

  • It all starts with Seeds
  • Seeds grow into Trees
  • Trees generate a yield in Mone

The idea is that Trees would be NFTs that are generating a passive yield of Mone, which would be a liquid ERC20 token to be used as a currency inside MetaGame, to pay for features, membership etc.

Stats & rarity attributes of the Tree tokens & the amounts of Mone they generate would be somewhat random but greatly influenced by the length of time a person has been “watering Seeds” as well as the total amount of Seeds watered.

Open questions

  • Do Seed LPs gain more Trees or Trees with higher yield as reward for watering Seeds?
  • What would be the minimum & maximum % yield/year generated by Trees?
  • Do Trees instantly start generating Mone or is there a delay?
  • How does watering Trees work; Does the yield change?
  • How are workers compensated in Phase II & Phase III? Does Mone yield split to Tree holders & workers equally? Do MetaGame’s Trees yield enough Mone? Do workers earn Seeds? Is there another “Fertilizer” token, to be used for Trees?
  • Should Mone token be subject to demurrage? As all fruit, it should decay & people would be incentivized to either spend it, donate it or water/fertilize Trees
1 Like

Following several meetings and conversations with Peth, we worked on extracting as much information as we could from him as to how MetaGame was intended, what goals were pursued and analyzed these to come up with recommendations that you will find in the file here: MetaGame Analysis - Google Docs

As there was no clear agreement from the beginning on the final deliverables, the budget associated with our analysis reflects this with a rate of the time spent working on the project at the moment.

Let us know if there is any question about the suggestions made in the file, thanks!